> Please Note: JTK is known to post *misrepresentations of truth* and of
> *deliberatly disrupting this newsgroup*. Please either *ignore his
> posts* or make sure you confirm the so-called "facts" he is posting.
>
It seems that there's another little bug here. The *ignore his posts*
in your
JTK wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Laurent
> Granger says...
>
>>
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mozilla.org&doctype=Inline
>>
>>
>
> Ooof. It's pretty amazing that Maozilla is able to render its own
> home page without crashing, as sensitive as it (and t
> Not because of the link, but because of what you are trying to do to
> this project. Yes, I either wish you get counseling, or you somehow
> *loose the ability* to damage the world around you (a permanent power
> outage whervever you are would also do the trick).
>
> From your posts it is a
JTK wrote:
> Mark Anderson wrote:
>
>>JTK wrote:
>>
You're either being paid by Microsoft
>>>Yeah that's the first time I've been accused of that by a religious zealot.
>>>
>>Uh, in the defense of the rest of we "religious zealot"s (your words,
>>not mine), Peter Lairo does not speak fo
JTK wrote:
> Then you are probably not a zealot of which I speak. The zealots I'm
> referring to will do everything in their power to supress the truth, to
> infringe freedom of speech, to disrupt the free flow of ideas in forums
> intended for that very purpose.
And yet I have also been called
Peter Lairo wrote:
>
> *Please Note*: JTK is known to post misrepresentations of truth and of
> deliberatly disrupting this newsgroup. Please either ignore his posts or
> make sure you confirm the so-called "facts" he is posting.
>
*Please Note*: Peter Lairo wants me to be semi-permanantly disab
JTK wrote:
> Mark Anderson wrote:
>
>>JTK wrote:
>>
You're either being paid by Microsoft
>>>Yeah that's the first time I've been accused of that by a religious zealot.
>>>
>>Uh, in the defense of the rest of we "religious zealot"s (your words,
>>not mine), Peter Lairo does not speak fo
Mark Anderson wrote:
>
> JTK wrote:
> >
> > >You're either being paid by Microsoft
> >
> > Yeah that's the first time I've been accused of that by a religious zealot.
>
> Uh, in the defense of the rest of we "religious zealot"s (your words,
> not mine), Peter Lairo does not speak for us. :)
The
Greg Miller wrote:
>
> Justin H. wrote:
>
> > Actually, there was absolutely *nothing* on the MS site that said that
> > the download was a new build. The information he posted was timely and
> > correctfor once. ;-)
>
> But it was posted to a newsgroup where it was completely inapprop
Justin H. wrote:
> Actually, there was absolutely *nothing* on the MS site that said that
> the download was a new build. The information he posted was timely and
> correctfor once. ;-)
But it was posted to a newsgroup where it was completely inappropriate.
There's nothing stopping pe
Peter Lairo wrote:
> You seem to cleverly mask your disruptive activities as seemingly real
> discussion or information (I was fooled by one of your posts). But after
> reading more of your posts, I have realized that your intention is not
> to help make a better browser, but to disrupt and di
Peter Lairo wrote:
>
> > No sir, just wanted to help Mr. Lag et al, who were having some
> > trouble finding the competition. That's just the kind of
> > "reprehensible" "slimeball" I am.
> >
> ANYONE here is quite cabable of finding M$ IE quite easily without your
> "help". M$ has made sure
DeMoN_LaG wrote:
>
> JTK wrote:
>
> >
> > No sir, just wanted to help Mr. Lag et al, who were having some trouble finding
> > the competition. That's just the kind of "reprehensible" "slimeball" I am.
> >
>
> Speaking of which... What is different about the new version?
>
> Still crashes as
JTK wrote:
>
> >You're either being paid by Microsoft
>
> Yeah that's the first time I've been accused of that by a religious zealot.
Uh, in the defense of the rest of we "religious zealot"s (your words,
not mine), Peter Lairo does not speak for us. :)
*Please Note*: JTK is known to post misrepresentations of truth and of
deliberatly disrupting this newsgroup. Please either ignore his posts or
make sure you confirm the so-called "facts" he is posting.
JTK wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peter Lairo says...
>
>> my oppinion of you
ANYONE here is quite cabable of finding M$ IE quite easily without your
"help". M$ has made sure that its product is easily locatable and
downloadable.
Please Note: JTK is known to post misrepresentations of truth and of
deliberatly disrupting this newsgroup. Please either ignore his posts or
JTK wrote:
>
> No sir, just wanted to help Mr. Lag et al, who were having some trouble finding
> the competition. That's just the kind of "reprehensible" "slimeball" I am.
>
Speaking of which... What is different about the new version?
Still crashes as much
Still really doesn't render c
JTK wrote:
> So let me get this straight: You wish me disabling ill-health because I posted a
> link to IE6.0.
>
> And you have the nerve to call me a "reprehensible" "slimeball".
Indeed, he probably should have just called you a spammer and left it at
that.
--
http://www.classic-games.com/
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg Miller says...
>
>Peter Lairo wrote:
>
>> my oppinion of you just took a 180 - you are obviously a slimeball.
>>
>> You're either being paid by Microsoft or just an *a..hole* (I suspect
>> both). Either way, your behaviour and actions are reprehensible.
>>
>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peter Lairo says...
>
>my oppinion of you just took a 180 - you are obviously a slimeball.
>
What'd you think of me before?
>You're either being paid by Microsoft
Yeah that's the first time I've been accused of that by a religious zealot.
> or just an *a..hole*
Peter Lairo wrote:
> my oppinion of you just took a 180 - you are obviously a slimeball.
>
> You're either being paid by Microsoft or just an *a..hole* (I suspect
> both). Either way, your behaviour and actions are reprehensible.
>
> You're obviously not going to go away on your own, so I hope
my oppinion of you just took a 180 - you are obviously a slimeball.
You're either being paid by Microsoft or just an *a..hole* (I suspect
both). Either way, your behaviour and actions are reprehensible.
You're obviously not going to go away on your own, so I hope you get ill
and can't use a PC
22 matches
Mail list logo
